KONAPALU SURYA NARAYANA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Revision has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 17.8.2011 passed by the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Jeypore in G.R Case No.8 of 2010 framing charges under Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(2.) THE prosecution case in a nutshell is that while the petitioner was working as Revenue Inspector, Chalkamba, one Purna Chandra Sabar filed an application before the Tahasildar, Gunupur for mutation of certain land in his favour which he had purchased on 2.5.2009. The Tahsaildar forwarded the mutation application, i.e., M.C. No.1438 of 2009 to the present petitioner for enquiry and report. Thereafter, the applicant, Purna Chandra Sabar went to the petitioner and requested him to furnish the enquiry report to the Tahasildar whereupon the petitioner demanded Rs.500/ - per acre from him for furnishing the enquiry report. When Sri Sabar expressed his inability to pay the amount, the petitioner asked him that unless he pays Rs.2,000/ -, the report will not be sent. Finding no other alternative, Sri Sabar under compulsion paid Rs.500/ - to the petitioner and about five days thereafter met the petitioner and expressed his inability to pay any further amount. The petitioner, however, asked him to pay Rs.1,000/ - more. Finding no other alternative, Sri Sabar agreed to pay the same on 19.2.2010 at his office and reported the matter to the Vigilance Department. A trap was arranged for 19.2.2010 and accordingly, independent officials, namely, Tankadhar Jani, Senior Clerk, Office of the District Agriculture Officer, Rayagada and Sri Debi Prasad Nayak, Assistant Agriculture Officer, Kolnara, District - Rayagada were called to the office of the D.S.P., Vigilance, Rayagada on 18.2.2010 and requested to assist the vigilance officials for execution of the confidential assignment. Accordingly, ten number of hundred -rupee notes brought by the complainant were smeared with phenolphthalein powder on both sides and a solution of sodium carbonate was prepared and other formalities were done. Thereafter, on 19.2.2010, the trap party went to Chalkamba. As per the previous plan, the trap party remained at a little distance in plain clothes whereas, the informant was sent with the tainted currency notes along with Tankadhar Jani, the accompany/over -hearing witness to the office of the petitioner. While the informant entered inside the office room of the petitioner, the over -hearing witness, Tankadhar Jani stayed near the door from where both the petitioner and Sri Sabar were visible and audible. Seeing the complainant, the petitioner asked him for money and when the complainant gave him the money, the petitioner instructed him to keep the same on his table. Accordingly, the complainant kept the same on the table of the petitioner. Seeing this transaction, the over -hearing witness - Tankadhar Jani gave prearranged signal to the remaining members of the trap team whereupon the members of the trap team rushed to the office of the petitioner. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance gave the identities of the members of the trap team, after which the face of the petitioner turned pale. Being confronted, the complainant stated that as per the instruction of the petitioner, he kept the tainted bribe money of Rs.1,000/ - on the table of the petitioner. On interrogation, the petitioner denied to have demanded and accepted the bribe of Rs.1,000/ - from the complainant. The left and right hand finger wash of the petitioner was taken one after another in the Sodium Carbonate Solution, but there was no change in colour. On being asked, the petitioner produced the mutation record of the complainant consisting of 18 sheets including the enquiry report of the petitioner dated 18.2.2009, The Mutation Record was seized by the Vigilance Inspector.

(3.) ON completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted.